基於不自證己罪原則，刑事訴訟法內禁止以不正訊問方法獲取被告自白。但為了預防將來發生危險，在別無他法的急迫情況下，可否刑求逼使相對人透露營救或其他資訊以避免危難的問題，在反恐以及援救生命的呼聲下，顯得並非絕對禁止。本文以此為研究對象，分別探討國際人權公約（主要如聯合國公民與政治權利國際公約以及歐洲人權公約相關規定）以及國內法律，主要如憲法內人性尊嚴保障、刑法的阻卻違法事由、刑事訴訟法以及警察法內之危險預防等之相關規定，深入分析預防性刑求的合法性以及實施預防性刑求者的責任問題，並提出結論。

Based on the privilege against self-incrimination, the Criminal Procedural Code forbids the use of illegitimate interrogation tactics to secure confession. However, the crucial question is: can the government torture a suspect, under exigent circumstances, for the need of public safety? Within the global trend of counter terrorism, torture may appear to be a permissible option, or at the very least, not fully forbidden. In order to answer this major research question, this article examines international human rights covenant (the International Covenant on Civil And Political Rights; Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) and domestic law, such as Constitution, criminal law, criminal procedural law, police regulations, to name only a few. Then it analyzes the legality of preventive torture, as well as the accountability following the use of such measures.